3 ms·
hoestly that's an real disservice to how hard it would be even to paint something from a projected image, this is the same kind of reductive judgement digital a
by shahar2k 4y ago
hoestly that's an real disservice to how hard it would be even to paint something from a projected image, this is the same kind of reductive judgement digital artists get today about making their art, I'd challenge anyone to try and take a camera obscura make a painting that looks as good as that one without the vast experience and training behind even simple things like handling and mixing pigments and filling in details that have moved.
even just knowing what you're looking at is a process of un-training your brain, a good art education actually starts from learning to see "correctly" and unsee all the shortcuts that your brain takes.
- achille 4y agoAbsolutely agree that this is an incredibly hard skill in any medium, digital or otherwise. It's also possible that Van Eyck may have perceived the world the same way we do, and the inclusion of small details such as the beads came only due to his artistic choice of tools. Conversely if you were trained to the same tool for sketching you would be forced to include the beads by way of process -- even if you had not noticed them before.